Mark 10 issues?

Gildor · 04-03-07, 08:38 AM

I read somewhere that the contact switch is allegedly reversed. Therefore your contact shots are possibly contact influence shots. There could be a bit of premature detonation and the shots are exploding some distance from the hull side.

As a test, I did not switch my shots from contact influence to contact as I normally would, and it seems that I am scoring bigger hits, if you get what I mean. More damage, holes in the hull; not always but more often.

Also, I tried a contact shot with the torp set 3 feet below the draft of the hull and it did explode. I followed this torp to see what it would do. It was in fact below the hull when it blew up. That ship only took the one shot to sink. This would seem to confirm the reverseal of the switch.

Galanti · 04-03-07, 08:53 AM

Could be, and therefore the reason the late-war Gatoes and Balaos are putting holes in marus is that by then, the magnetic/contact issues are straightened out in the game.

Thanks Gildor, I'll give that a shot! No other explanation makes sense.

Blood_splat · 04-03-07, 09:35 AM

I had a mark 10 hit a propeller shaft blow up and there was no visible damage. The ship just carried on like nothing ever hit it.

akdavis · 04-03-07, 10:04 AM

I had no issues with Mk. 10s in my last patrol. A huge passenger liner fell to 2 Mk. 10s (actually three hits total, but secondaries started after second hit).

Galanti · 04-03-07, 09:47 PM

Ugg, I tried setting pistols to magenetic and back and forth in two quick missions: the 1942 Balikapan and the 1944 Borneo Convoy one. In 1944, all hits resulted in gaping holes, regardless of pistol settings. In 1942, all hits resulted in SFA (Sweet Farg all).

Also, the 1942 test involved steep angles on the strikes, I was thinking this historical problem was modelled, but no luck. Any ideas or similar experiences?

TheSatyr · 04-03-07, 10:02 PM

People seem to think that only MKIVs had problems. The MkXs had the same dud and premature explosion probs that the 14s had...only not quite as severe.

You probably just had a bad run of duds.

Galanti · 04-04-07, 07:00 AM

Satyr, I'm hoping this is the case. Do you have any evidence that this is modelled in the game? If it's modelled that the early 10s have the same issues, only to a lesser degree, that's cool.

ijozic · 04-04-07, 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSatyr

People seem to think that only MKIVs had problems. The MkXs had the same dud and premature explosion probs that the 14s had...only not quite as severe.

IIRC, Mk10 doesn't have a magnetic detonator so there were no premature detonations. It is also slower than Mk14 so it didn't have the contact detonator issues at high angles. What it did have is the somewhat deeper-than-set running depth (not as severe as Mk14) but not due to the faulty pressure sensors as in Mk14, but because it's warhead was heavier than the testing head which was fixed by the beginning of 1942.

04-03-07, 08:38 AM	#1
Gildor Lieutenant Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto, Ontario Posts: 251 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Contact switch reversed. I read somewhere that the contact switch is allegedly reversed. Therefore your contact shots are possibly contact influence shots. There could be a bit of premature detonation and the shots are exploding some distance from the hull side. As a test, I did not switch my shots from contact influence to contact as I normally would, and it seems that I am scoring bigger hits, if you get what I mean. More damage, holes in the hull; not always but more often. Also, I tried a contact shot with the torp set 3 feet below the draft of the hull and it did explode. I followed this torp to see what it would do. It was in fact below the hull when it blew up. That ship only took the one shot to sink. This would seem to confirm the reverseal of the switch. __________________ U-46: Oct 1943 off Portugal

04-03-07, 10:04 AM	#4
akdavis Samurai Navy Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Fort Worth, Texas Posts: 597 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	I had no issues with Mk. 10s in my last patrol. A huge passenger liner fell to 2 Mk. 10s (actually three hits total, but secondaries started after second hit). __________________ -AKD

04-03-07, 08:53 AM	#2
Galanti Captain Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Ottawa Posts: 536 Downloads: 106 Uploads: 0	Could be, and therefore the reason the late-war Gatoes and Balaos are putting holes in marus is that by then, the magnetic/contact issues are straightened out in the game. Thanks Gildor, I'll give that a shot! No other explanation makes sense.

04-03-07, 09:35 AM	#3
Blood_splat Samurai Navy Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Beneath the waves Posts: 568 Downloads: 20 Uploads: 0	I had a mark 10 hit a propeller shaft blow up and there was no visible damage. The ship just carried on like nothing ever hit it.

04-03-07, 09:47 PM	#5
Galanti Captain Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Ottawa Posts: 536 Downloads: 106 Uploads: 0	Ugg, I tried setting pistols to magenetic and back and forth in two quick missions: the 1942 Balikapan and the 1944 Borneo Convoy one. In 1944, all hits resulted in gaping holes, regardless of pistol settings. In 1942, all hits resulted in SFA (Sweet Farg all). Also, the 1942 test involved steep angles on the strikes, I was thinking this historical problem was modelled, but no luck. Any ideas or similar experiences?

04-03-07, 10:02 PM	#6
TheSatyr Captain Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 545 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	People seem to think that only MKIVs had problems. The MkXs had the same dud and premature explosion probs that the 14s had...only not quite as severe. You probably just had a bad run of duds.

04-04-07, 07:00 AM	#7
Galanti Captain Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Ottawa Posts: 536 Downloads: 106 Uploads: 0	Satyr, I'm hoping this is the case. Do you have any evidence that this is modelled in the game? If it's modelled that the early 10s have the same issues, only to a lesser degree, that's cool.